SURINDER KUMAR versus STATE OF HARYANA

Citation: [2011] 12 S.C.R. 1205 · Decided: 21-10-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P. SATHASIVAM · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 4 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2011] 12 S.C.R. 1205 
SURINDER KUMAR 
v. 
STATE OF HARYANA 
(Criminal Appeal No. 328 of 2004) 
OCTOBER 21, 2011 
[P. SATHASIVAM AND DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Penal Code, 1860: s.302 - Conviction based on dying 
declaration - Allegation against the accused that he poured 
kerosene on the victim and set her on fire which resulted in C 
her death in hospital - Victim made statement in hospital 
implicating the accused - Trial court did not find the dying 
declaration reliable and acquitted the accused - High Court 
convicted the accused on the basis of dying declaration - On 
appeal, held: The dying declaration was totally in conflict with 
D 
the version of the prosecution as to the time of her burning 
and the relation of the accused with the victim - There were 
serious omissions on part of investigating officer in 
conducting investigation - Though there were immediate 
neighbours/co-tenants and landlord in the premises where 
E 
incident took place, their statements were not recorded - The 
dying declaration was recorded in the absence of doctor - At 
the time of recording the statement of the victim, no 
endorsement of the doctor was obtained about her fitness to 
make such statement - The victim was under the influence 
F 
of injections and was not supposed to have normal alertness 
- As per the doctor's report, victim had suffered 95-97% burns 
injuries - In view of that it is highly doubtful that ~he could 
possibly put her thumb impression below her statement -
Dying declaration·did not carry a certificate by the Magistrate G 
to the effect that it was a voluntary statement made by the 
victim and that he had read over the statement to her - Trial 
court rightly rejected the. dying declaration which was 
altogether shrouded by suspicious circumstances and 
1205 
H 
1206 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 12 S.C.R 
A contrary to the story of prosecution - Inasmuch as the dyinf 
declaration was the only piece of evidence put forward agains 
the accused, the accused entitled to the benefit of doubt -
Conviction set aside - Evidence Act, 1872 - s.32. 
8 
The prosecution case was that the appellant-accused 
was on visiting terms to the house of victim's husband 
PW-7 who was working and living in a different city. The 
appellant ~eveloped illicit relationship with the victim. 
PW-7 suspected the same and stopped the victim from 
meeting the appellant whereafter the appellant started 
C threatening and harassing the victim. On the fateful night, 
when PW-7 was away from his house, the appellant come 
to the house of victim and set her on fire. The victim was 
taken to the hospital where she was initially examined by 
the doctor (PW-1 ). PW-1 referred her to PGI, Chandigarh. 
D Thereafter, at P.G.I., the doctor (PW-9) examined her and 
reported a case of 95% burns. The Magistrate (PW-2) was 
deputed to record her statement. The Magistrate who 
reached PGI applied to the Doctor In-charge to certify if 
the victim was mentally and physically fit to make a 
E statement. The doctor certified that she was fit to make a 
statement. Thereafter, her statement was recorded which 
was to the effect that she had gone to see a movie with 
four ladies where one boy 'S' was sitting on the back seat. 
After seeing the movie, the victim came back to her 
F house. The appellant came in the evening to her house 
and said that if she had any sense of shame, she should 
die by burning herself. Thereafter, the appellant took 
kerosene ·from a container and sprinkled it over her and 
set her on fire with a match stick. When s!le was in flame, 
G he put a quilt upon her and ran away. The neighbour took 
her to hospital and from there she was referred to P.G.I., 
Chandigarh. 
The trial court did not find the dying declaration Ex. 
PD reliable and acquitted the appellant. The High Court 
H 
SURINDER KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA 
1207 
allowed the appeal filed by the State and convicted the 
A 
appellant under Section 302, IPC and sentenced him to 
undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. The instant 
appeal was filed challenging the order of the High Court. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
B 
Held: 1. If, after careful scrutiny, the Court is satisfied 
that the dying declaration is free from any effort to induce 
the deceased to make a false statement and if it is 
coherent and consistent, there shall be no legai 
impediment to make a basis of conviction, even if there C 
is no corroboration. It is not in dispute that if the dying 
declaration 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.